| Basic info | Taxonomic history | Classification | Included Taxa |
| Morphology | Ecology and taphonomy | External Literature Search | Age range and collections |
Gobiconodon bathoniensis
Taxonomy
Gobiconodon bathoniensis was named by Butler and Sigogneau-Russel (2016). Its type specimen is NHM M46527, a tooth (upper right molar), and it is a 3D body fossil.
Synonymy list
| Year | Name and author |
|---|---|
| 2016 | Gobiconodon bathoniensis Butler and Sigogneau-Russel p. 53 figs. Figs 7A–C, 8A, B |
Is something missing? Join the Paleobiology Database and enter the data
|
|
If no rank is listed, the taxon is considered an unranked clade in modern classifications. Ranks may be repeated or presented in the wrong order because authors working on different parts of the classification may disagree about how to rank taxa.
†Gobiconodon bathoniensis Butler and Sigogneau-Russel 2016
show all | hide all
Diagnosis
| Reference | Diagnosis | |
|---|---|---|
| P. M. Butler and D. Sigogneau-Russel 2016 | Small-sized upper molars, whose main cusps show an “incipient triangular pattern, cusp A being placed more lingually than cusps B and C” (Kielan-Jaworowska and Dashzeveg 1998, p. 417), generally diagnostic of the genus Gobiconodon, and differing from the pattern seen in G. luoianus Yuan et al., 2009. Differs from G. hoburensis (Trofimov, 1978), G. borissiaki Trofimov, 1978, G. ostromi Jenkins et Schaff, 1988, G. hopsoni Rougier et al., 2001, and G. zofiae Li et al., 2003, in that teeth in corresponding serial positions are narrower, with the occlusal contour triangular rather than rectangular, and the ectoflexus shallower (though this feature varies from M1 to M5 in the above species). Differs from G. zofiae, where cusps of molars are aligned antero-posteriorly, cusp D is said to be “degenerated” (Li et al. 2003, p. 1129), and E larger than B. Closest in size to G. hoburensis and G. palaios Sigogneau- Russell, 2003a. Differs from G. hoburensis with cusp A relatively higher and shorter, and lateral cusps better detached from A; last molar more reduced. Differs from G. palaios in shallower ectoflexus and D cusp more pointed in crown view. Differs from the other Jurassic form, Huasteconodon Montellano et al., 2008, in its larger size, larger cusp C, occlusal shape, lesser ectoflexus, and roots narrower transversely, not visible in occlusal view. |
Measurements
No measurements are available
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|||||
|
|
||||
| Source: c = class, subp = subphylum, uc = unranked clade | |||||
| References: Luo et al. 2003, Hopson 1973, Carroll 1988, Hendy et al. 2009 | |||||
Collections
No collection or age range data are available